It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Were there 7 Adams and Eves that were placed on the 7 continents

page: 5
4
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How do you know that?


Because scientists know when the continents separated as well as when the first humans appeared in the world and they weren't anywhere close to each other.

Pangaea


It assembled from earlier continental units approximately 300 million years ago, and it began to break apart about 175 million years ago


Human evolution


The earliest documented representative of the genus Homo is Homo habilis, which evolved around 2.8 million years ago

edit on 16-2-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: LSU0408

The scattering of the nation's,
www.biblegateway.com...:1-9

Why, well man was corrupt even the children of Noah, there is another tower which is the right one.
This is one of the earliest version of the bible, the Codex Sinaiticus
www.jacksonsnyder.com...

I once read a book that was about a discovery in the monastery of saint catherine on mount sinai.
www.historyofinformation.com...
Included were texts which are not part of the modern bible.

One description in the translation of some of the lost leave's of the codex found in that scroll I read was with the church as a Tower, but the stone's had to be perfect and any with a flaw (still sinful as the stones were the people) was thrown out of it by the spirit of the church which was depicted not as christ but as a female spirit whom was espoused to christ, I wonder if what I read was actually a gnostic text sealed away in that chamber and forgotten about long ago because it was so at odd's with the more forgiving nature of later christianity and portrayed a strange female spirit of the church whom was unmerciful to any stone (soul) which had a flaw, of course let he that is without sin cast the first stone so I suspect that book was deliberately lost by the monk's of the early church and that it's origin like I say may have been more gnostic than christian, it even had a name for that female spirit of the church and it described her and the angels whom were building the church in a terrifying manner, how they would smash and throw into fire those whom were not perfect or did not fit into the church, not a pleasant book for a young man to read especially given how at odd's it was to my entrenched view of christianity.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 02:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Gondwanaland and Pangea are still hypothetical models based on computer simulation of reverse continental drift, there may have also been other earlier continental structures, as for land mass well remember that for the bulk of there existance all continental material show's immersion in water and even high mountains were once on the bottom of the ocean with of course the Himalayas of today being the Tethis sea of 20 million years ago were deer like creatures are supposed to have evolved into semi aquatic ancestors of whale's and dolphin's.

Also Time flow is not necessarily a constant but not to get too far into membrane theory and the effect it may suggest interaction between membrains in superspace have upon the percieved laws of the universe from our perspective or how time flow could have been faster in the past and actually slowing while doing so at a non uniform and perhaps even selective rate (imagine time as a spectra rather than an imaginary all encompassing motion of some aetheric principle) then even radio isotopic dating may be far less predictable and reliable over that longer period and indeed future membrane interaction with our own native universal membrane structure may also lead to time (and other supposedly fixed laws of the universe) becoming an erratic or even unreliable principle in th future, indeed studying time flow or passage of time as a fixed constant is a perhaps an error as it may be anything but a reliable fixed constant upon which to place our long term study of the past.

It effect's everything if you consider just a few of the implication's it suggests.

edit on 16-2-2016 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

Let's put it this way, there is no logical reason to assume that humans existed on a planet where all the land masses were one giant continent.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

On this site I have been introduced to some new ideas such as planetary Inflation theory, I don't believe in planetary inflation theory but then even though I am a christian I also believe the human race is far, far older than either science or religion want to accept.

I actually suspect you could find evidence of humans hundred's of million's of years in the past, I am sceptical of the standard evolutionary model as well, indeed most creationist sites use some relics that do not fit that model and suggest human existance far into the past as evidence for wrong science, I actually think the science is sound but has a broken picture and that some science is biased to the extreme and that some scientific heirarchys are acting more like there own version of the spanish inquisition with any scientists producing such a theory about more ancient modern humans likely to be run out of town.
www.hecklerspray.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

There will always be proponent's and oponents of any such claim's especially when it threatens one groups BELIEF's or Reinforces another groups BELIEF's.

Personally I think humanity may even be older than the earth itself or rather that there may be other races of man even unrelated to us whom we would recognise as broadly human if we lived on the same body that is.

Religious, the angels are Human or very similar but seem to have made a leap that evolution can not explain, certainly many religions around the world have being whom are not human having sex with and creating children from women, many of these children are monstrous, the titans and the greek god's, the Nephilim etc.

My religion is that a being even higher than them became flesh in HUMAN form and of course he is older than the Universe.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 03:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Krazysh0t

On this site I have been introduced to some new ideas such as planetary Inflation theory, I don't believe in planetary inflation theory but then even though I am a christian I also believe the human race is far, far older than either science or religion want to accept.


Why? What would lead you to make THIS proclamation? We can find fossils of microscopic organisms that date back to the very first life forms on this planet, and you think there is this magical amount of humans that predated evolutionary time periods?That doesn't flow logically. Where are these humans in the fossil record? At least young earth creationism has a book of mythology to fall back on to to back up their craziness. I have no idea where you got your assumption from.


I actually suspect you could find evidence of humans hundred's of million's of years in the past, I am sceptical of the standard evolutionary model as well, indeed most creationist sites use some relics that do not fit that model and suggest human existance far into the past as evidence for wrong science, I actually think the science is sound but has a broken picture and that some science is biased to the extreme and that some scientific heirarchys are acting more like there own version of the spanish inquisition with any scientists producing such a theory about more ancient modern humans likely to be run out of town.
www.hecklerspray.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Well all you have to do is find the evidence and you'll be proven right. I don't subscribe to fringe theories like this until some concrete evidence is presented though.


There will always be proponent's and oponents of any such claim's especially when it threatens one groups BELIEF's or Reinforces another groups BELIEF's.

Personally I think humanity may even be older than the earth itself or rather that there may be other races of man even unrelated to us whom we would recognise as broadly human if we lived on the same body that is.


No scientific evidence for this.


Religious, the angels are Human or very similar but seem to have made a leap that evolution can not explain, certainly many religions around the world have being whom are not human having sex with and creating children from women, many of these children are monstrous, the titans and the greek god's, the Nephilim etc.

My religion is that a being even higher than them became flesh in HUMAN form and of course he is older than the Universe.


This is why I don't believe in religion. It distorts people's perception of reality and makes them ignore scientific data that says they are wrong.
edit on 16-2-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 05:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Now hold on a moment you have just declaired a belief, "We can find fossil's", yes we are all aware of fossil evidence and how it can be skewed by either side.

Take the human footprint controversy at paloxy and how someone took an iron bar to them to smash them.
Take the rumours of the smithsonian having disposed of massive amount's of archeaological evidence much of it uncatalogued.
Take the constant plethora of actually accepted and later discredited anthropological find's and compare to the denial and refusal to accept potential evidence of earlier human find's.
www.mcremo.com...
www.forbiddenarcheology.com...
www.andersoninstitute.com...

As a general rule of thumb the further back you go the less fossil evidence you will find, the fossil's of micro organisms are included in this but there sheer numbers mean that if you look for fossil evidence of micro organism's today you will find them, look for them in older strata you will find them and go back before the earliest known multi cellular organism and you will find them.

Remember the cambrien explostion 650 million years ago, for an exhorbitane amount of time scientists flatly refused to accept that previous eco system's and mutli cellular life could have existed.

Heard about the snow ball earth theory, it postulates that between 2.2+ billion years about to 750 million years ago the earth underwent a period of extreme ice age's, indeed the ocean is believed to have frozen over completely at least once during this all the way to the equator meaning that only extremophiles such as those chemosynthetic life form's clustered around the deep sea volcanic vent's could have survived and thrived during this time, ignoring spore form bacterial survival that is but now they are pushing back the evidence of multi cellular life to the very start of this period, albeid unsurprisingly simply multi cellular creature's but then given the fact that to use that 650 million year figure which was when the cambrien explosion occured the same time period of 650 million years see's the majority of the earth's surface geologically cycled meaning survival of fossil's older than that is extremely rare and for those few over 2 billion years old even vurging on the near impossible.

Supposedly ancient rock's from that time period were actually buried or deep crustal rock's so even there appraisal of the atmospheric conditions is based on limited data but regardless chemosynthetic life can exist in the deep ocean devoid of light and it is concievable that a different class of life even multi cellular could have existed but what if the oxygenation period was actually far earlier which given the presence of water on the planet for the majority of it's existance seem's actually highly likely, or what if there were previous period of oxygenisation.

What if the face on mars which has been impacted by a mysterous object or exposed to a high energy blast causing a landslide to disfigure it as one side slid down after this event which occured sometime recently after perhaps NASA lost contact with a probe that was supposed to photograph it in detail and before the latest images were taken by a later mission, well what if that was built by human's from here whom evacuated the planet and colonised that world which back then had a thicker atmosphere, probably a magentosphere and liquid ocean's and what if we are merely a recollonisation with grey's are actually simply another branch of humans adapted to living in artificial conditions and controlled environments (Two arm's, hand's, two leg's, feet, head with small NOSE, Mouth and two eye's in the human configuration if strange to our view and if they are real as thousands attest to from abduction account's).

Of course I am getting into the GREY area but what makes you think human's are really only just a recent development, were did they get there fear and awe at the sky, why do so many believe in other races or super being's that can and have mated with woman sometime's leaving there progeny on the earth.

Face it modern scientific theorem's about the past such as Anthropology and Archeaology have a lot of baggage from there period of being at odd's with the church, even after the church ceased to look for a fight with them they have enshrined the I AM RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG notion into there followers head's at a religious level of dogmatic adherance to accepted model's and even in some cases apparently destroyed evidence that there model is wrong.

So creationist's may have some of there time line facts skewed but so too did many whose idea's have become standard model in these sciences even though these founding father's of anthropology and archeaology were not always the most scientific people and often had an axe to grind with the church.

And as for NO scientific proof I must point out that the storys about modern human skull's in the wrong strata and the wrong place are too many to be hoax, also there are artifact's which can not be simply explained away.
www.examiner.com...
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

Remember also the Russians hold to a slightly different doctrine to the west when it comes to ancient artifacts, go to india and there religion holds to human civilizations hundred of thosuands of years ago.

But we base our world view on a legacy 18th century view in which western europeans were believed to be the most highly evolved life form on the planet.

The chinese though put it like this, the most cunning creature is the one no man has yet seen.

listverse.com...

In the west they are constantly pushing civilization further and further back, Gobekli Tepi is the current golden child but this same fraternity whom control by the way the majority of the worlds investment into this research have ignored the two massive sunken stone city's in the gulf of Khumbaht off of southern india which may be just as ancient and far more impressive.
grahamhancock.com...

Then there is the ruins of north west cuba, no they are not natural formations and I am actually angry that they scare some so much they feel the need to attack that find cosntantly, a city that may be as much as 50.000 years old but is probably far younger as that rate of submergance ingores the impact of ice on the crust and sub crustal magma displacement during the last ice age which may have accounted for that region being far higher in altitude far more recently than that theory.
www.ancient-origins.net...

www.wakingtimes.com...

Even in Egypt there may be evidence of an earlier pharonic or otherwise age of civilization complete with pyramids larger even than those at Giza, but in a far worse condition.
www.ancient-code.com...

Back when I studied we were told that a theory can never be proven only proven wrong, a theory can only be supported.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 11:52 PM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

Good one!


To the OP's question, no, there was only 1 Adam and Eve.



posted on Feb, 17 2016 @ 06:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Now hold on a moment you have just declaired a belief, "We can find fossil's", yes we are all aware of fossil evidence and how it can be skewed by either side.


No I declared evidence. I don't need to "believe" in the fossil record. It exists.


Take the human footprint controversy at paloxy and how someone took an iron bar to them to smash them.
Take the rumours of the smithsonian having disposed of massive amount's of archeaological evidence much of it uncatalogued.
Take the constant plethora of actually accepted and later discredited anthropological find's and compare to the denial and refusal to accept potential evidence of earlier human find's.


I don't believe rumors. Only evidence.


As a general rule of thumb the further back you go the less fossil evidence you will find, the fossil's of micro organisms are included in this but there sheer numbers mean that if you look for fossil evidence of micro organism's today you will find them, look for them in older strata you will find them and go back before the earliest known multi cellular organism and you will find them.

[snip for space]

Of course I am getting into the GREY area but what makes you think human's are really only just a recent development, were did they get there fear and awe at the sky, why do so many believe in other races or super being's that can and have mated with woman sometime's leaving there progeny on the earth.


If you want to declare that humans have lived longer, all you have to do is prove it. You pointed out that scientists didn't want to believe in life before the Cambrian explosion. Well what changed their mind was the discovery of fossils that predated it. So you can't just declare that humans existed longer than the accepted time frame and be believed. You have to actually prove it.


Face it modern scientific theorem's about the past such as Anthropology and Archeaology have a lot of baggage from there period of being at odd's with the church, even after the church ceased to look for a fight with them they have enshrined the I AM RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG notion into there followers head's at a religious level of dogmatic adherance to accepted model's and even in some cases apparently destroyed evidence that there model is wrong.

So creationist's may have some of there time line facts skewed but so too did many whose idea's have become standard model in these sciences even though these founding father's of anthropology and archeaology were not always the most scientific people and often had an axe to grind with the church.


The difference between the church and science is that science is willing to admit it is wrong. Just prove it so.


And as for NO scientific proof I must point out that the storys about modern human skull's in the wrong strata and the wrong place are too many to be hoax, also there are artifact's which can not be simply explained away.


There are actually explanations for all of those things if you were just willing to look at them.


Remember also the Russians hold to a slightly different doctrine to the west when it comes to ancient artifacts, go to india and there religion holds to human civilizations hundred of thosuands of years ago.


Irrelevant. I'm talking about accepted scientific doctrine. Russian scientists agree with it. Indian scientists also agree with it. Religion gets no say in how things worked out in the past because it is almost always proven wrong by science.


But we base our world view on a legacy 18th century view in which western europeans were believed to be the most highly evolved life form on the planet.

The chinese though put it like this, the most cunning creature is the one no man has yet seen.

listverse.com...

In the west they are constantly pushing civilization further and further back, Gobekli Tepi is the current golden child but this same fraternity whom control by the way the majority of the worlds investment into this research have ignored the two massive sunken stone city's in the gulf of Khumbaht off of southern india which may be just as ancient and far more impressive.
grahamhancock.com...


Civilization is one thing. We are talking about the beginning of human existence. Civilization came MUCH later.


Then there is the ruins of north west cuba, no they are not natural formations and I am actually angry that they scare some so much they feel the need to attack that find cosntantly, a city that may be as much as 50.000 years old but is probably far younger as that rate of submergance ingores the impact of ice on the crust and sub crustal magma displacement during the last ice age which may have accounted for that region being far higher in altitude far more recently than that theory.
www.ancient-origins.net...

www.wakingtimes.com...

Even in Egypt there may be evidence of an earlier pharonic or otherwise age of civilization complete with pyramids larger even than those at Giza, but in a far worse condition.
www.ancient-code.com...

Back when I studied we were told that a theory can never be proven only proven wrong, a theory can only be supported.


No one is saying that our knowledge is complete. Like I said, if you want people support your claims, just produce the evidence. You make it sound like this is an impossible feet. If fossils exist of smaller organisms dating back even past the dinosaurs, then it reasons that human fossils should exist all the way back to whenever they first appeared on the planet.

Currently, scientists have traced the genealogy of humans back to a specific subset of Africa though. So it is unlikely this evidence you are talking about exists.
edit on 17-2-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2016 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t


Gen 5:4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.



posted on Feb, 17 2016 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Adam and Eve is a fictitious concept. It is impossible to breed a race out of 2 individuals. The human race has not dipped below 2000 reproducing individuals at any point during its evolution. There is a minimum viable population for every species. You would need somewhere between 80-160 unrelated individuals to even have a chance at populating even a single country, let alone the whole world.

Let's get out of this bronze age mythology and look to science for answers. So far science has gotten millions of things right over the years, while religion disappears piece by piece. Science may ruffle feathers at first do to personal biases, but the facts are what prevail in the long run. Deny ignorance.


edit on 2 17 16 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

you forget, though you probably don't believe it, but after the Flood there were only four couples and only three of those couples could reproduce. In those three couples were all the mix Genetic code for all races and it is from them that all the nations/races come.



posted on Feb, 17 2016 @ 02:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Barcs

you forget, though you probably don't believe it, but after the Flood there were only four couples and only three of those couples could reproduce. In those three couples were all the mix Genetic code for all races and it is from them that all the nations/races come.


Yeah man you forgot about magic.....with magic anything you want to be true is true!!

Pretty terrible OP OP
edit on 17-2-2016 by Prezbo369 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2016 @ 03:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: musicismagic
I believe that there were. I know environmental conditions can probably change the skin conditions somewhat, but I'm quite sure that man and womenkind were not just 2 people of only one continent.


Seven? I don't even buy that there were two.



posted on Feb, 17 2016 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't like using this as I have used it too many time's now but please open your mind, what constitutes evidence and NO this is not making funny shapes and dancing sheep from the cloud's with my mind.

How about an ancient body in a decayed space suit on the moon,

First off recognise that the moon is not a safe environment and thing's will decay there though the process is abiotic due to the lack of a viable atmosphere and harsh radiation exposure.

So the decay takes time, it may be very rapid for some molecular matrices such as organic materials and long chain molecules made up of element's that are volatile in those conditions were temperature vary extremely from direct sunlight to shade and were radiation and micro particle bombardment is an environmental constant.

Stronger molecular structures such as metallic crystaline structure will last longer but will certainly also decay over prolonged time periods as Temerature varience causes ductile stress over that time as well as both particle bombardment and radiation exposure which of course also take there toll on the weaker atomic bond's breaking the smaller crystals apart from one another inside the metal latice were there bonds are weakest (you know about metals how a seemingly solid peice of iron for example is actually made up of many iron crystal's sharing weaker bond's between them and were impuritys increase the number of these flaw's which are were ductile stress fracturing occurs in short term mechanical life here on earth such as in machine parts, air frames etc.

So such a body would likely be just a dust ghost after a few hundred eon's to several million years with different parts in different states of decay, of course it could be a lot older as well but the moon is a harsh environment in other way's such as moon quakes and impact event's.

Here I have highlighted in case of myopia or snow blindness.
files.abovetopsecret.com...

And here is an earlier version of the same image from a now long defunct conspiracy site.
files.abovetopsecret.com...

Original medium-high res scan of the full image
files.abovetopsecret.com...

And just to highlight some areas I found interesting on it.
files.abovetopsecret.com...

Now what about other site's on the moon, well what about a wreckage pile elsewhere, no distinct clear bodys but there are catapillar tracks, a well, a cab in two half's and something nose down in the dirt, remember NASA used air brush monkey's, artists paid to hide or touch up details on these before public release so who know's what else there was that they DID hide.

Artificial colour and highlighted for your amusement.
files.abovetopsecret.com...

Then there are these,
files.abovetopsecret.com...
files.abovetopsecret.com...
Which remind me of this interview with Charlie Duke one of the Apollo astronauts
Here is an excerpt in which he speak's of a DREAM he had on the moon,

"Well, yes. In my dream John Young and I were driving the lunar rover up to the north and we as we came across a ridge, there was a set of tracks out there in front of us. We asked Houston if we were allowed to follow the tracks. Houston said yes. So, about an hour later we found another lunar rover with two guys on it that looked like me and John. I felt kind of comfortable. I took parts from this other vehicle, to show to the people down at Houston. Now, when being actually on the Moon, we were going north towards our objective which was North Ray crater and as we went over the hill, I recognized, generally, the little valley that I've seen in a dream before. But in the dream there was a set of tracks. Of course the tracks were not there! It was so vivid.. Yeah I've seen this before, or something very similar in the dream I had. The dream was so vivid that when we were landing I looked out of the window to the north to see if there were any tracks on the surface of the Moon! The landscape was very similar to what I have seen in my dream."

Taken from this page.
www.vembos.gr...

And remember there were drugs and psychological mind programming techiques available back then that could effectively manipulate and even change a person's memory's so maybe, just maybe it was not a dream but he was conditioned to think it had been, he took parts from the other vehicle to bring back to earth so it was dead, just sitting there presubably were it had finally stopped long ago and so too were it's occupants maybe the last victims of a war that had destroyed there civilization back on earth.


So I am thinking,
And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. The dragon and his angels waged war, and they were not strong enough, and there was no longer a place found for them in heaven

How long ago, hundred's of thousand's, millions or even billion's, how many wars have there been in heaven?.

How long does it take for metal to powder down and slowly break apart in those conditions, obviously the asteroid's show some metals ie nickel and iron are superbly resistant and maybe we should use them for radiation shielding as well but how long for refined polymers, ceramic's and alloy's to powder down from temperature induced ductile micro crystaline stress fracturing and radiation bombardment as well as ballistic impact space ejecta.

That corpse as I believe it to be look's pretty human to me and the likely age is before Lucy's grandma decided to swing down out of the tree's eh?.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.dailymail.co.uk... tml

Of course with the last one we had a theory about using nuclear bomb's to melt the ice on mars and warm it's atmosphere a few years earlier but radiation would be a problem for settlers not to mention any artifacts or remains if we did.

edit on 17-2-2016 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:41 AM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767

Yea yea. My mind is closed because I can't accept YOUR biases. You have no idea what I've researched, looked into, and have believed. If I tell you that I disbelieve something it's because I found the available evidence not up to my high standards for belief.


How about an ancient body in a decayed space suit on the moon,


What about it? No such thing exists. And you are using pareidolia on those pictures to see something that isn't there.

Being open minded doesn't mean you believe in every sketchy idea that comes across your face. It means you entertain the idea, look at the available evidence, then make a judgment call from there. You also don't just create a bunch of assumptions like you have above and then substitute that for your beliefs.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 07:51 AM
link   
What if Pangea separated not as far back as they claim. When you think that the Earth crust is around 20KM thick in most places and that were floating on lava. A large celestial body passing by or pole shift might have suddenly seperated Pangea. Sunk/risen and or separated the crusts in a short period time.


In the ancient Sumerian text weren't the Adams created as workers because the Annunaki workers protested and the Adams were all clones created as replacement workers. I always wondered about their lifespans being so long back then. When were the Eves created? Were the Eves created many thousands years later? When the Eve was created was this when cloning ended and procreation of the new species allowed?



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Barcs

you forget, though you probably don't believe it, but after the Flood there were only four couples and only three of those couples could reproduce. In those three couples were all the mix Genetic code for all races and it is from them that all the nations/races come.


Exactly. The mythical great flood is even more reason to show that the book of genesis is wrong. Such a thing would not be possible. Genetic disorders would be prevalent and extinction is virtually guaranteed.

Mythology doesn't over ride science, although many of us wish that it did.
edit on 2 18 16 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Barcs

Exactly. What Chester said there violates everything science knows about minimum viable populations. Thus the Bible cannot be accurate.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 11:24 AM
link   
From what I have read of the research on the human genome, within four generations of one woman one man breeding, then children interbreeding, all subsequent offspring would be deformed idiots, I think I read that the genome would need a minimum of 5,000 pairs to be viable, which makes me wonder about the theory all Europeans sprang from 8 female humans, according to the female DNA, I don't know, perhaps I have just not read enough yet?




top topics



 
4
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join